Below is a link to a General Electric propaganda cartoon or
public relations video on nuclear power made for "educating" kids. I was shown this video as a fifth grader on a
school trip to the Indian Point nuclear power plant just outside New York City. The cartoon talks about nuclear power in a
way a fifth grader could understand and fittingly enough also depicts the
recognizable Fukushima reactor design.

I think fifth
grade was a premature start to my nuclear education. I was still trying to conquer simple
mathematics and spelling. Fifth grade is
way too early to learn about nuclear power. However it is not too early to learn an
opinion on nuclear power. Of course the
intent on bringing fifth graders to a reactor, showing them a film and then
having a question and answer session with ten year olds on nuclear energy was
to teach an opinion.

In reading the "reporting"
of much more successful writers, "journalists" and "environmentalists" who are
supportive of nuclear power makes me certain that many of these people must
have began their education prematurely on practically every subject they have
studied. For they seem incapable of dealing
in facts and analysis, having already learned opinions. Anyone who is still for nuclear energy is
anti human and anti entirety even, with the mentality of a selfish, sugared up
fifth grader.

Chernobyl has
destroyed a swathe of land, a whole section of the environment of planet Earth. A twenty mile circumference is uninhabitable
and the surrounding area is infested with radioactive elements. Rare sickness is on the increase in the area and
the radioactive particles were blown into Germany and France and all over. German hunters no longer can eat most of the
wild boar, for they are too radioactive.
This is supreme environmental destruction.

With that in mind,
what "environmentalist" would support nuclear power then? Surely these "environmentalists" supportive
of nuclear power are at best mentalists.

- Advertisement -

They compare oil
and coal to nuclear power as the only other option. Oil and coal are harmful, as well as power derived
from nuclear energy. They steer the
argument by first basing it on other harmful forms of energy. The conversation is about renewable resources
or jeopardizing resources. They further
argue that to build the infrastructure for solar for instance is ridiculous,
but they ignore the fact that small scale options are best, easy with low
impact. Implementation of renewable
resources such as growing fuels, building solar, wind, wave or geothermal
structure takes time, but waiting for such structure is much better than
waiting for Cesium or any other number of radioactive elements to burn out.

They speak of half
life as if it means something encouraging.
If the half life of radioactive Iodine is about nine days, that means in
nine days its power is halved and in another nine days it is halved again and so
on. This means iodine is destructive to
biological life, you included, for about a hundred days. The half life of cesium is thirty years. The half life of plutonium is virtually forever.

Ethan Indigo Smith is the son of a farmer and nurse who was later adopted by artists. Ethan was raised in Maine, Manhattan, and Mendocino, California. Ethan is a proud dropout. Ethan has traveled the world and has been employed briefly as (more...)